Shakespeares works have persistently influenced humanity for the
past four hundred
years. Quotations from his plays are used in many other works of
literature and some
common phrases
have even become integrated into the English language. Most high
schoolers have been
unsuccessful in avoidance of him and college students are rarely afforded
the luxury of
choice when it comes to studying the bard. Many aspects of
Shakespeares works
have been researched but one of the most popular topics since the 1960s
has been the portrayal of women in Shakespeares tragedies,
comedies, histories and sonnets.

In order to accurately describe the role of women in
Shakespeares A
Midsummer Nights Dream, one must first explore the female
characters in the
text. Shakespeares works had few females because women were not
allowed to act in
London in the late 1500s and early 1600s. Disregarding the
standards imposed on
women of his time, Shakespeare created many female characters that were
strong-willed,
intelligent, and daring. Hermia of A Midsummer Nights Dream
is one such
character. She disobeys her father, her king, and the Athenian law so
that she might
marry the love of her life. She discards all the luxuries of her
familiar and comfortable
existence for the uncertainties of a distant land in exchange for the
freedom to love
Lysander. The only complaint against Hermia by feminist critics stems
from her willingness
to defy one set of confinements derived and maintained by menher
father, the king,
and the male authors of Athenian lawto become the subordinate of
yet another man.
However, even though she rebels away from the limitations she ultimately
runs towards,
she is much more independent and admirable than her bosom buddy, Helena.
Helena is
desperate and pathetic in her attempts to love Demetrius. Being too
lowly to ask for
Demestriuss love, she instead begs to be in his presence saying,

I am your spaniel; and Demetrius,
The more you beat me, I will fawn on you:
Use me but as your spaniel, spurn me, strike me,
Neglect me, lose me; only give me leave,
Unworthy as I am to follow you.
(II.i.203-207)

These words and the entire alliance between Demetrius and Helena have
the subtext
of a sexually sadistic and masochistic relationship (Greene et al. 151).
This
correlation leaves little in Helena to be admired by feminist critics.
Her only
intelligent scene in the play spawns from her discovery of the Athenian
lads
infatuation with her as she screams, "Can you not hate me, as I know
you do/ But
you must join in souls to mock me too?" (III.ii.149-150).

Through Helena Shakespeare created a woman so pitiful and wretched
that he openly
mocked the modern sixteenth-century women who allowed themselves to be
treated in such
a manner. Had a man been the monarch of England when this play was
written, the bard
might have been more discrete in his support of feminism. Luckily, Queen
Elizabeth was
fond of autonomous women and showed little animosity towards such
mockery.

The queen of fairyland, Titania is a deceivingly strong feminist at
the opening of
the show. She combats her counterpart, Oberon, with such a rage that
diseases run
rampant, seasons dangerously alter and all of humanity suffers from their
discord.
As a powerful and emancipated woman, she commands her own army of fairies
and does not
succumb to the persistent wishes of Oberon. Unfortunately, even as a
deity she is
fallible due to her sex. She inflicts her own sleep and in this
venerability is
entrusted to the protection of one inept guard who is overtaken by Oberon
with menial
effort on the gods part. From the moment of entrancement via
Oberons potion,
Titania is the epitome of weakness. She falls in unrestrained
infatuation with a donkey
and displays her affection so as to publicly ridicule herself. Only when
her adornment
of Bottom, who by no coincidence entomologically transforms into an ass,
transgresses
beyond the point of being grotesque does Oberon release her from the
spell. She is
nauseated by the vision of this half-breed donkey-man in her bed and
turns to Oberon
in meek embarrassment of her orgasmic acts instead of the anger
rightfully expected for
his fabrication of the entire ordeal. The character of Titania at the
end of the play
vastly differs from the goddess who fought viciously at its opening. She
begins to act
dolce, submissive, and humble as any good little goddess should.

The other two female characters are comparatively smaller roles, but
no less significant
in the feminist critics eye. Hippolyta is the conquered queen of
the Amazon whose
marriage to Theseus may or may not have been eagerly anticipated on her
behalf. She shows
no restraint, discounting the history of her recently crushed empire, but
she displays
no real excitement either. After her marriage to Theseus she maintains
some independence
which is demonstrated by sarcastically disagreeing with her spouse
concerning the merits
of actors. He comments on the use of ones imagination to
compensate for poor acting
and she retaliates stating, "It must be your imagination then, and
not theirs"
(V.i.13-14). Depending on interpretation of the Amazon Queens
line, one can assume
Hippolyta had not been conquered in spirit and would not be trodden over
in her marriage
as she was in defense of her kingdom.

The only other woman written into the script is Thisbe, the leading
lady of
Shakespeares play within a play, or mousetrap performance. Placing
all
hideous acting on Flutes behalf aside, the character of Thisbe is a
reflection of both Romeos Juliet and Midsummers Hermia
in her
determination and strength in rebelling her fathers wishes, though
Thisbe shows
no signs of either Juliets or Hermias wit (or taste in lovers
for that
matter).

Knowing this array of female characters in A Midsummer Nights
Dream builds
a base for analyzing Shakespeares perspective on feminism but does
not begin to
answer the question of Shakespeares view of women. By analyzing
female bonds one
can derive more insight on Will Shakespeares outlook (Kolin 40-41).
A prime example
of a contorted friendship lies in the relationship between Hermia and
Helena. These
ladies had been like sisters in their love for each other and yet Helena
betrays Hermia
by relating Lysanders plans of eloping with Hermia to Demetrius.
By doing so Helena
displays her own stupidity for without Hermia in Athens Demetriuss
admiration may
have returned to Helena, but she would rather risk the marriage and life
of her best
friend for a lone word of thanks from her love. She shows her jealousy
by stating, "How
happy some oer other some can be!" (I.i.225). Still one
cannot
justify her actions to be anything less than blind foolishness attributed
to low I.Q.

Through this relationship Shakespeare demonstrated his belief that
some women are as
daft and dippy as Helena and Thisbe while others can be as intelligent
and brave as
Hermia and Hippolyta. This theme was reiterated as Titania narrated her
story of woe
over her dearest friend in India who was stripped of mortal life while
giving birth to
an Indian prince. In this case both women are portrayed as carefree,
wise and in a state
of bliss probably due to the fact that there is no male figure to disturb
the peace. This
tale also explains Titanias reluctance to give the boy to Oberon
and reflects her
own limitations as a goddess for her inability to prevent the death of
her only real friend.
Typical sexism is shown by Oberons success in gaining this boy, for
society can not
allow a woman to rear a prince for he should romp and play and not be
adorned with flowers
by foolish women. The boy, and all boys in general, should "trace
the forests
wild" in a train of mischievous lads (II.i.25).

One of the most mischievous lads in all of Shakespeares works is
Midsummers character of Puck. Puck is neither a fairy nor a
deity, but has
abilities that lie somewhere between these two distinctions. Puck
differs in that he does
not take a human form, but is usually the image of an elf or male nymph.
He leads the life
young lads desire and grown men remember with glee. Puck is a prankster
who curdles fresh
milk, topples chairs from under old women, misleads night wanderers only
to laugh at
their folly and frustration, and performs innumerable other knavish acts
of injustice
all in the name of fun. Though Shakespeares characters are
frequently scripted
to perform cross-gender roles in the playing out of their lives, by
cross-gender casting
traditionally male roles an entirely new element is added to the themes
of the play
(Kolin 6-7). For example, as played by a male, the character of Puck is
the mans
dream of youth and harmless trouble. If this role is undertaken by a
female and likewise
played as such, Puck evolves more to a modern day sexual fantasy, which
could even
include a hint of homosexuality as Puck encounters Titanias fairy
in the woods. As
a woman, Puck becomes infinitely intriguing. The relationship between
Oberon and Puck
is re-evaluated and much of the dialogue between the two denotes sexual
connotations.
The discord between Titania and Oberon breaches another level of inflamed
jealousy, he
still of her changeling boy and she now of Puck. The same playfulness
that defined the
male character of Puck transforms from simple knavery to delightful evil
in the female
version. She becomes an ideal feminist as she disagrees with her
higher-ranking officer
yet suffers no repercussions for her deeds. She obeys the orders of her
king, but is by
no means submissive in her actions. Indeed Puck as a woman has many
traits of
Shakespeares strongest female characters and none of their faults.
Because Puck
is non-human, Shakespeare had no need to create a realistic, well-rounded
character and
Robin Goodfellow enjoys the freedom of perfection. For even the
practical jokes this
hobgoblin performs are lovable and because they are remedied before they
become harmful,
Puck is not faulted for the turmoil he/she causes. Feminists enjoy Puck
as a woman because
she is infallible and by far the most resilient of Shakespeares
female characters.

Feminists truly enjoy all of Shakespeares women. Even though
some are annoyingly
submissive, the mockery of these women counteracts any animosity felt by
feminist critics.
Queen Elizabeth I certainly influenced many of Shakespeares plays
and characters and
he may have become more feminist due to his desire to please her. The
general public may
also have preferred strength in female characters as a reflection of
pride for their
beloved monarch who was one of the few highly competent English rulers in
spite of her
gender and the sexism of the time in which she lived. Regardless of his
reasoning for
scripting women the way he did, Shakespeare was most certainly an
advocate for feminism
when he wrote A Midsummer Nights Dream. From the feminist
perspective,
liberal thinking and open-mindedness like William Shakespeares are
welcome to
invade our modern literature and lives for the next four hundred years.